The claimant, a parts coordinator, was hired by the Employer to conduct the receipt and inventory of automotive parts (i.e., unboxing, inspecting, and moving various automotive parts). The claimant testified that she was injured while performing her normal job duties when she lifted a car hood that weighed between 15 and 20 pounds. The claimant further testified that she notified her supervisor of her symptoms and that she needed medical attention.
The claimant testified that she told the emergency room she was injured at work. However, the medical notes from her initial evaluation following the alleged injury documented that the claimant had experienced low back and leg symptoms for approximately six months, and that the claimant did not report any acute injury, nor did she report injuring her back at work.
Respondents offered multiple Employer-witnesses, who testified that the claimant did not report a work injury on the date the claimant alleged she was injured. In text messages between the claimant and Employer, the claimant never stated that she believed she was injured at work. Respondents additionally offered the opinion of an IME to support Respondents’ argument that the claimant’s diagnoses were not work related.
The ALJ did not find the claimant’s testimony regarding the nature and onset of her symptoms to be credible or persuasive. Rather, the ALJ credited the medical records, expert opinions, and Employer-witness testimony, and ultimately held that the claimant failed to demonstrate that it was more likely than not that she suffered an injury arising out of and in the course and scope of her employment with the Employer.
Davis v. Caliber Holdings and LM Insurance, W.C. No. 5-283-015 (Feb. 23, 2025).
Want to know more? Contact Ilene Feldmeier at ifeldmeier@pollartmiller.com or 877-259-5693
